|Peter Boettke|
In June of 1933, the LSE hosted a "mock trial of the economists", who were accused of the crime of "conspiracy to spread mental fog". This episode is the subject of a new work paper by David Levy and Sandra Peart. This paper continues the series of papers by Levy and Peart that question the role of the expert in a liberal society.
On July 26th 2011, the LSE will host a debate with Lord Skildelsky and Jamie Whyte on the topic of Keynes versus Hayek. The contemporary debate will not I am assured entail any hint of the suspension of the rule of law as might have been hinted at in that earlier mock trial.
LSE in the 1930s was a fascinating place, and it remains an amazing intellectual environment to this day.
Who is Jamie Whyte?
Posted by: Mario Rizzo | July 13, 2011 at 03:42 PM
He is associated with the Cobden Centre or Adam Smith Institute and was the guy who hosted the BBC 4 radio show on the resurgence of Austrian Economics, for which I was interviewed. He's pretty good.
For the record, both Pete and I were asked to be on the Hayek side of this debate, but both had prior commitments we could not change.
Posted by: Steve Horwitz | July 13, 2011 at 03:50 PM
I had never realized the Cambridge group responded to the LSE letter to the Times. Usually you only see the initial Cambridge letter and the LSE response.
That was a great letter - it's on page 22 of the paper.
Posted by: Daniel Kuehn | July 13, 2011 at 04:35 PM
Jamie Whyte is a sort of grumpy popular philosopher.
He's pretty good at economics...
http://www.cobdencentre.org/author/jamie/
Posted by: Current | July 13, 2011 at 04:54 PM
Lord Skildelsky is a very skilled debater.
Posted by: Jerry O'Driscoll | July 13, 2011 at 05:28 PM
Links.
http://www.coordinationproblem.org/2011/01/bbc-4-episode-of-analysis-on-austrian-economics.html
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00y2bwz
Posted by: Argosy Jones | July 13, 2011 at 10:14 PM
"conspiracy to spread mental fog"
Philosophy Harry Frankfurt wrote a dandy little paper on that topic ...
Posted by: Greg Ransom | July 14, 2011 at 12:32 AM
L.S.E. lectures & discussions are available on iTunes at iTunes U -- Niall Ferguson gave a series of terrific lectures this year which you can download, one of them discussing the cold war economic struggle & even a bit of Hayek.
Posted by: Greg Ransom | July 14, 2011 at 12:34 AM
It tells us something about the British academy -- and not something good -- that the LSE had to look overseas for an academic competent in the ideas of Hayek, one of the greatest minds of the last 100 years.
"For the record, both Pete and I were asked to be on the Hayek side of this debate, but both had prior commitments we could not change."
Posted by: Greg Ransom | July 14, 2011 at 12:37 AM
Hayek had a very dim view of Beveridge's competence with economics. Hayek's standard claim is the Kaldor & others wrote such things as The Beveridge Report, the economics of which Lord Beveridge, in Hayek's telling, barely understood.
Posted by: Greg Ransom | July 14, 2011 at 12:41 AM
Daniel, I would be very interested in what you thought was great about the letter. I see it as obfuscation.
Posted by: McKinney | July 14, 2011 at 10:17 AM
Well it's a good summary of the trouble with universal presumptions about perfect crowding out.
The thing I personally liked most about it was that they cited Adam Smith as one of the best examples of people who struck down this zero-sum thinking. I've said for a while that Keynes continues in the Smithian tradition of pushing people away from the instinctual zero-sum thinking about the economy that people have. So it was pretty cool to see Keynes himself make the connection for me.
Posted by: Daniel Kuehn | July 14, 2011 at 11:23 AM
Daniel, but the letter accuses Hayek et al of using zero-sum thinking when they weren't. It defeats a straw man.
Posted by: McKinney | July 14, 2011 at 01:17 PM
However, I like the fact that the third letter resurrects Say's law and uses it as a defense of Keynesian econ. The irony is deep!
Posted by: McKinney | July 14, 2011 at 01:19 PM
BTW, the article is very entertaining! Thanks!
Posted by: McKinney | July 14, 2011 at 05:51 PM
George Selgin has now been confirmed as the keynote speaker for the Hayekian side of this debate! I'm sure George is more than capable of dealing with Skidelsky. There were rumours on this side of the pond that Krugmam was going to show his face on the Keynesian side, but that doesn't seem to have come off. The line up now is George Selgin and Jamie White for Hayek, and Skidelsky and someone i've never heard of for Keynes ( a journalist type who will mirror Jamie White's role).
Posted by: Mark Pennington | July 16, 2011 at 10:05 AM